Tale of another Indian journey
Shahid Alam sails back into some rich history
Koto Janapad Koto Itihash is the third, though chronologically the first of the three in terms of publication, historical travelogue written by M. Sakhawat Hussain that I am reviewing. Like the other two, it deals primarily with Indian history, concentrating a good deal on the Mughal period. Unlike them, however, it is not as carefully written, and is marred by a number of anomalies and confusing information. Also different is that the author devotes at least as much attention on the Indian Election Commission and the 2009 Indian elections (in the conduct of which he was an observer), the Rajputs, the Sufi saints, and the Delhi Sultanate as to the Mughals, in this case primarily on Humayun, Akbar, Shahjahan and Aurangzeb. Notwithstanding the shortcomings, Hussain, a self-avowed avid history buff, has composed an absorbing account that moves seamlessly along a string of different topics. As with the other books, he has the sporadic profound observations and comments, which cogently reflect the state of politics and society in Bangladesh. However, let us first take up some of the confusing or anomalous information before going on to the book's subject matters. At one point Hussain introduces British Field Marshal Lord Roberts as having been the C-in-C of British India during the 1857 India's War of Independence, and of which he had written an account. India-born Roberts, son of Gen. Sir Abraham Roberts, was a Lieutenant in 1857 and had won a Victoria Cross (VC) for supreme bravery during that war. Incidentally, his son, Lt. Roberts, also born in India, won a VC during the Second Boer War in South Africa. He was killed in action. Field Marshal Roberts was made C-in-C India in 1885. During the 1857-59 War, first Major General (later Field Marshal) Sir Patrick Grant, and then Major General (later Field Marshal) Sir Colin Campbell were the C-in-Cs. Hussain also states that Nana Sahib Dhondu Pant and Tatya Tope, two of the leaders of the Indian Rebellion, were hung by the British in April 1859. Tope was, but, from authoritative accounts, Nana Sahib had escaped to either Nepal or some place in the U.P., or had moved from one to the other. He simply disappeared from view, and one account has it that he died in 1906 at the age of 81. Then, the revolt and martyrdom of Bhagat Singh centered on the arrival in Lahore of the Simon Commission, and not the Simmons Commission as Hussain writes. Earlier, the author had identified Qutubuddin, Maizuddin, and Shazia as being the offspring of one of Sultan Shamsuddin Iltutmish's wives, presumably thereby making Rokonuddin, Nasiruddin, and Razia as the children of another and, therefore, full siblings. Yet he identifies Rokonuddin as the step brother of Razia. Furthermore, Hussain states that the captivating Begum Soomro had died in 1836 at the age of 90, soon after having given her birth and death years as 1753 and 1836, respectively. And, finally, in a footnote (p. 54), he identifies Nurjahan as Shahjahan's wife! On the subject of Sultana Razia, the author notes that she was the first woman in the subcontinent, indeed the Islamic world, to become an independent ruler, but the male population at that time did not look favourably on her ascension to the throne. Interestingly, on a related topic, Hussain bemoans that the Jame Masjid of Delhi is not cared for as well as it could have been. The Saudi government had at one point made a direct offer of $100 million to the Masjid committee for the mosque's upkeep, but the Indian government has thus far (till the composition of the book) not responded favourably to the offer. No explanation has been given, but the author speculates that the Indian government would not wish the liberal Sufi tradition of Islam in India to be influenced by the strict Wahabi brand (practiced in, and espoused by, Saudi Arabia). Hussain, in my view, to his great credit, worries about the rise in recent times of Wahabism that has brought about much strife and conflict in the world, and feels the urgent need for the teachings of Nizamuddin Aulia, Mainuddin Chishti, Shah Jalal and their ilk. Other observations and comments of Hussain are worth a mention. He is convinced that the British policy of divide and rule that facilitated and helped perpetuate their colonial reign created so much animosity between the Muslims and the Hindus that the consequence was the partitioning of India. However, he also points out that this situation was largely brought about by the Indians themselves, by their eagerness to cater to the foreign invaders. The author is passionate about the importance of preserving important heritage sites. "Those sites do not belong to just a single country," he says. "They belong to the future generations and to world civilization. If they are destroyed, human civilization will lose out." He notes how the Bengali regiments in the British army prior to 1857 had only token Bengali representation, and that the lion's share of the soldiers were drawn from the Punjab, especially after the War of Independence. This recruitment practice was continued after the partition of India, but, although, over time, India was able to reduce Punjabi preponderance in its army, Pakistan could not, with the consequence of routine deprivation of the Bengalis that eventually led to the creation of Bangladesh. Hussain's pithy explanation for the fall of the Mughal Empire, paradoxically, indicates some of the very attributes that made the period of the Great Mughals, in the words of my professor at Boston University, Walter Clemens, the apex of human civilization. The author singles out the latter (lesser) Mughals' lavish lifestyle, idiosyncrasies, and addiction to the harem as the prime reasons for the decline and fall of the empire. Interestingly, the Great Mughals indulged in some of the same outlandish lifestyle that actually contributed significantly to their stellar cultural achievements. The Mughlai/Shahi food, poetry, music, deportment, the gardens, and the buildings, of which, of course, Taj Mahal is the most sublime and famed, more often than not grew out of the individual emperor's whims or interests. And all the Great Mughals, including the puritanical Aurangzeb, were inveterate harem addicts. Curiously, following the Mughal-e-Azam Akbar's decree, none of their daughters were allowed to marry! And, so they took lovers for themselves, including Aurangzeb's sisters. Of course, his eldest sister, Jahanara, a poet and an avid patron of the high arts, has carved out a niche for herself in Indian history. And, speaking of the Taj, scholars have pretty much settled on Ustad Ahmed of Lahore as its chief architect. All of humanity salutes him. Of all the accolades showered on its beauty, I still find that of an Englishman the most surpassing: "After all these years, it still looks like it has been carved out of moonlight!" The lesser Mughals maintained, and even took a step or two further, all the indulgences of their predecessors, but fell well below their administrative acumen, vision, resolve, military capabilities and diplomatic skills that made them Great Mughals. They, in fact, went effete, and let their ancestors down. The author talks at some length about two of the mightiest rulers of ancient and medieval India --- Asoka the Great and Akbar the Great. The irony about Asoka is that the religion he converted to and helped propagate vigorously outside India, Buddhism, is flourishing in those countries, but has been reduced to a relatively insignificant minority in the land of its birth, India. A similar fate has befallen Urdu in the land of its birth, India. Hussain does not fail to mention the existence of Hindu extremists who had assassinated Gandhi, and continue to strive to take India back to its Vedic existence as a purely Hindu country. The author mentions a number of individuals who made his travel easier than it could have been, and has an "if only it would turn into reality" wish for the political culture of Bangladesh: that the principal political parties should nominate able and deserving candidates for elected positions. In recounting the capture of Tatya Tope, he brings to the fore a shameful trait in sections of the subcontinent's population: a penchant for betraying even close friends and relatives in order to advance one's own interests. Tope, for the record, was betrayed to the English by his close friend Man Singh. Hussain, though, makes a quizzical statement: that Indian culture has mesmerized Great Britain to the point where the Queen's English has been transformed into Indianized English! I thought that Indian culture, in its varied manifestations and media, has been ferociously influenced and transformed by relentless American media and cultural onslaught! For all its imperfections, Koto Janapad Koto Itihash is an easy read, and should draw attention to the long and rich history of the Indian subcontinent.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments